Go to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/...046526&type=ML and enter these short messages for your elected officials.
The system will remember your name, etc., so you only need to enter all that once.
After that, its cut-and-paste to hammer each of the respective the messages forward.

Please send a separate message for each bill

Please oppose H.R. 137(sponsor: Representative McCarthy)
This bill would prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition clips.

Please oppose H.R. 138 (sponsor: Representative McCarthy)
This bill would prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition clips.

LOVE the last two bills. Glad there is something in the works in DC that's positive.

H.R. 34, 117, 137, 138 are not surprising. Do you have any more specifics on 34/117? What does "tightening" mean.

H.R. 21 seems the most likely to go through, in my opinion.

I FAIL to see how 65 and 141 has ANYTHING to do with ANYTHING, other than just jumping on the bandwagon.

H.R. 142 is the scariest in my opinion. That one has to go, out of all the others.

__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor

Please oppose H.R. 21 (sponsor: Representative Moran)
This bill would require background checks for all gun sales, and to require gun owners to report when their guns have been stolen.

What ?? That's our "Republican" Senator, who's supposed to be such a strong 2A supporter. Putting the word on this one, and the letter /calling campaign will begin. He may need a new job after the next election...... when he gets voted out.

They (Dem's or someone) has really convinced them there is a "gunshow loophole" and unlicensed dealers selling guns without background checks.

We've been having a real time getting our reps to understand, there are NO unlicensed dealers at gunshows...... nor that aren't doing background checks. It doesn't exist. It is "personal sales" ....... at least one Rep assigned an aide to try to talk to me until the points I was making was understood. Finally..... they read the laws I was pointing out to them, and the lightbulb went off .. and they understood it. They kept saying, "there must be a section" ...... they finally realized, the info they had gotten ... was all bogus.... there is no "gunshow loophole".

133 (the first one) seems to seek to remove the 30.06 signs from schools. My mom works in a school has for 20 years that looks great to me. On the second one how do they think theyll know when you bought that mag? none of my mags have any way that i can see to indicate as to its date of manufacture or purchase. All this will do is make it waaaay more expensive.

Lets compromise and tighten background checks. Most of us have a CCW, or some other thing like FOID, etc already. Lets have a license for ownership. It can only be revoked if you do the same crimes as would make you lose your gun rights now. Then anyone carrying a firearm who was a felon, etc would get a stiff fine and mandatory 2-5 years of moderately hard labor, to help discourage the practice.

The law would be written where the definitions of prohibited persons would be narrowly defined. The process to revoke would be tough and difficult, but so would the initial background check.

I know, I know, I know, I know firearms ownership is a right. I believe that as much, or more than anyone. However, tougher checks on who is buying firearms and ammunition, might actually prevent something. It would have for instance prevented Cho who did VA Tech.

Nate: If you are willing to give up our 2a rights over a few rare tragedies why retain any rights at all? Surely we could save far more lives by allowing the authorities to search your home without a warrant or put you in jail as soon as they "know" you've done something wrong rather than messing around with evidence and trials. We know these mass shootings tend to spur copycats so maybe we should ban reporting on them?

I've tried, but I can't find an excuse for not making it as difficult as possible for felons and those adjudicated to be mentally ill from acquiring firearms. Background checks and coordinating mental health records with the database, is actually one of the few things that would really help.

Screaming my rights, in the face of something that would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, isn't doing us any favors.

Proving one isn't a felon or a loon, isn't tantamount to surrendering our second amendment rights in my mind. . . .

Perhaps not in your mind, but it puts the burden on those wishing to exercise this fundamental, individual right on those wishing to do so, before they are allowed. For a comparison in the First Amendment context, it is akin to a prior restraint.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nate45

. . . .I've tried, but I can't find an excuse for not making it as difficult as possible for felons and those adjudicated to be mentally ill from acquiring firearms. Background checks and coordinating mental health records with the database, is actually one of the few things that would really help.

Screaming my rights, in the face of something that would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, isn't doing us any favors.

There's little evidence to support the notion that imposing such a restriction (forcing everyone to prove that they're entitled to exercise the 2A prior to exercise of same) would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals.

Mind you, I'm not fussing about the coordination of mental health records. That's probably a good idea. My concern on that front is how we (the American public & Congress) will define "mentally ill," and where we'll draw the policy line at when it's appropriate to deny someone the 2A.

__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman

Nate, I understand your sentiment. I also believe that if our backs are against the wall, we may need to offer comprimises which we can live with, instead of having no say at all.

BUT (and this is a very important "but"), we are nowhere near the point where our back is against the wall. Well, unless you live in New York State. I feel bad for those folks, but as a resident of a different state, I have no say in what goes on there. It is their fight.

As far as federal action goes, I don't think anything will get through congress, except for the most harmless of window-dressing...if that...

I think that real, meaningful, positive, effective firearm regulation could be possible. Regulations that the vast majority of gun owners could agree with. But NEVER in the current political envirionment. The gun-ban crowd have so poisoned the politics that there is no sense of trust among our side... and why should we have any trust? The gun-ban politicians have demonstrated repeatedly that their ultimate goal is a prohibition on private ownership of any firearm which could possibly be used in self defense. After the Newtown tragedy they have shown their cards yet again. Our side does not trust them to negotiate sensible laws in good faith.

So only the government can have big guns? And we can only have little ones?
So one gov't. says sell them magazines or go to jail, and the other gov't.says sell em and go to jail. Boy Howdy, what's a cowgirl to do? Even if the founding fathers hadn't said from now on, we get what the gov't. gets, I'd smell a rat. But then, I never was completely civilized. Just another failure of the system.
It's a wonderful life. Don't weaken your resolve.

Proving one isn't a felon or a loon, isn't tantamount to surrendering our second amendment rights in my mind.

So every American should be forced to ask the Federal government for permission before exercising their 2a rights? That's not a right. Also, if we have universal background checks do you honestly believe that wouldn't turn into registration or are you ok with that too?

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.